Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    18
    This petition is about trying to stop any wind farms, or individual wind turbines from being created using government money. Wind turbines are not an efficient source of green energy, they are ugly, loud, widely opposed by the public and have been known to explode. They also will not become Carbon Neutral until the year 2020. There are many more viable green and other sensible energy producing options. Therefore the money gained from this would be used to invest in other energy means, preferably tidal power, and investment into nuclear facilities.
    Offline

    12
    Britain is the best country in Europe to harness wind power, being the windiest. Tidal power would mean the construction of massive tidal barrages that require huge investment. Plus, Britain has a lack of densely populated river areas, so many river projects would mean loss of housing.

    I quite like turbines I can see one on my horizon its quite nice really. You've made baseless assumptions about the vast mahority.

    No.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Have you got any evidence for this? It sounds like common tabloid hearsay and myth to me. I completely oppose this petition.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    18
    (Original post by MacDaddi)
    Britain is the best country in Europe to harness wind power, being the windiest. Tidal power would mean the construction of massive tidal barrages that require huge investment. Plus, Britain has a lack of densely populated river areas, so many river projects would mean loss of housing.

    I quite like turbines I can see one on my horizon its quite nice really. You've made baseless assumptions about the vast mahority.

    No.
    Tidal power is cheaper than wind power and i didn't mention HE power so that point is irrelevant. Also they are not assumptions they come from polls from the Great British public.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    18
    (Original post by rsplaya)
    Have you got any evidence for this? It sounds like common tabloid hearsay and myth to me. I completely oppose this petition.
    It should be well known that wind turbines have to be backed up by gas turbines that operate inefficiently and always will; therefore the only way to make wind farms carbon neutral is to further develop the wind turbine making it more efficient to counter balance the gas cylinder. This would cost lots of money and is many years away.
    Offline

    12
    (Original post by nebelbon)
    Tidal power is cheaper than wind power and i didn't mention HE power so that point is irrelevant. Also they are not assumptions they come from polls from the Great British public.
    A tidal barrage in the Severn estuary could cost up to £34 Billion. Nice and cheap.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Whilst I agree we need to look at other renewables and clean energy sources (preferably nuclear), we cant afford to say no to wind turbines altoghether. To those complaining about ruining the view, see it like this. You can either lose a few nice fews and have the others protected because we built more renewables, or you can lose them all due to climate change. Your choice.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    18
    (Original post by MacDaddi)
    A tidal barrage in the Severn estuary could cost up to £34 Billion. Nice and cheap.
    I wasn't talking about putting in the Severn estuary. They would start off as small strips off of the coast. Also Nuclear energy is a viable alternative.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nebelbon)
    This petition is about trying to stop any wind farms, or individual wind turbines from being created using government money. Wind turbines are not an efficient source of green energy, they are ugly, loud, widely opposed by the public and have been known to explode. They also will not become Carbon Neutral until the year 2020. There are many more viable green and other sensible energy producing options. Therefore the money gained from this would be used to invest in other energy means, preferably tidal power, and investment into nuclear facilities.
    I've pos-repped you as I don't think you or any other member for that matter, especially a new one, should be negged here, but I'm afraid I wholeheartedly disagree with the petition. The public opposition is more due to misunderstanding and media misrepresentation than anything else. We absolutely need Green Energy of every shade, and wind turbines and completely renewable and increasingly efficient. They play a vital part of the UK's hopeful future as a carbon-neutral state.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    18
    (Original post by Moleman1996)
    Whilst I agree we need to look at other renewables and clean energy sources (preferably nuclear), we cant afford to say no to wind turbines altoghether. To those complaining about ruining the view, see it like this. You can either lose a few nice fews and have the others protected because we built more renewables, or you can lose them all due to climate change. Your choice.
    We can afford to say no to wind turbines all together because they only cover a fairly small amount of energy produced in the UK. With the development of a new nuclear plant underway, this also clears the path for others to be created. Climate change won't cause a loss in views what so ever; that is completely ridiculous.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    18
    (Original post by CLS94)
    I've pos-repped you as I don't think you or any other member for that matter, especially a new one, should be negged here, but I'm afraid I wholeheartedly disagree with the petition. The public opposition is more due to misunderstanding and media misrepresentation than anything else. We absolutely need Green Energy of every shade, and wind turbines and completely renewable and increasingly efficient. They play a vital part of the UK's hopeful future as a carbon-neutral state.
    Thanks for the rep, but honestly the poor soul who negged me doesn't phase me :P Nuclear power could easily cover the energy requirements for all that green energy could produce. It is time to start cancelling inefficient means of getting energy, the developers of wind turbines have said themselves that their designs are inefficient. It is a money grab by them and the government trying to hard to pander to EU targets.
    Offline

    12
    (Original post by nebelbon)
    I wasn't talking about putting in the Severn estuary. They would start off as small strips off of the coast. Also Nuclear energy is a viable alternative.
    That is the best site for a tidal barrage in the UK. If you're talking about small-scale projects that would make it even less cost-efficient. Nuclear is the future.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nebelbon)
    We can afford to say no to wind turbines all together because they only cover a fairly small amount of energy produced in the UK. With the development of a new nuclear plant underway, this also clears the path for others to be created. Climate change won't cause a loss in views what so ever; that is completely ridiculous.
    Climate Change = rising sea levels = flooding.
    Climate change = more emissions = more acid rain, especially from South America which is still industrialising.

    If a significant enough temperature change occurs than many of the plants may find the conditions too harsh to survive in, thus reducing the "natural beauty" of many of these areas.

    I dont disagree that nuclear is the way forward, I just think that as we improve turbine technology it will prove useful, and large scale planned developments can already produce a fairly sizeable chunk of power for the areas they're in.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    I'm surprised no-one's mentioned Solar power yet. It seems to me the most harmless route is to layer the Gobi desert et al with fields of solar panels. The effect on the natural and human environments would be zero. If we invest now we could find ourselves with considerable clout in the energy market and politics by extension in the near future as non-renewable sources begin to dry up.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tuerin)
    I'm surprised no-one's mentioned Solar power yet. It seems to me the most harmless route is to layer the Gobi desert et al with fields of solar panels. The effect on the natural and human environments would be zero. If we invest now we could find ourselves with considerable clout in the energy market and politics by extension in the near future as non-renewable sources begin to dry up.
    Problem with Solar is witht he current technology youve gotta use the power pretty much as soon as its generated or lose it, its difficult to store. Although i did here they've done somethign at one plant involving heating salt to store the energy generated...
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    Welcome Squad
    (Original post by MacDaddi)
    Britain is the best country in Europe to harness wind power, being the windiest.
    It always make me giggle when I see things like "Britain is the windiest country" - I mean, who in their right mind would be that guy who makes these figures?! :mmm:

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    18
    (Original post by MacDaddi)
    That is the best site for a tidal barrage in the UK. If you're talking about small-scale projects that would make it even less cost-efficient. Nuclear is the future.
    I completely agree that Nuclear is the future; but we must invest in other systems whilst Nuclear plants are being built.
    • TSR Support Team
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    TSR Support Team
    No-one really gives a damn about efficiency, it's all about cost per kW. Much of what you say about wind turbines is nonsense picked up from the Daily Mail anyway. For example, " the developers of wind turbines have said themselves that their designs are inefficient" - source? Hardly likely given that they can approach 45%, which is pretty good given that the absolute maximum they can be is 59.3%.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    nay
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Moleman1996)
    Problem with Solar is witht he current technology youve gotta use the power pretty much as soon as its generated or lose it, its difficult to store. Although i did here they've done somethign at one plant involving heating salt to store the energy generated...
    I'm guessing the technology to store it for the medium term does exist but its not cost-effective. Shouldn't be long before the clever clogs change that. When they do, I really hope it becomes our energy of choice.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    What's your favourite Christmas sweets?
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.